BCS - BrisConnections Unit Trusts

[Enzyme]

Re: Brisconnections shareholders - financial ruin

Had my first phone call from Brisconnections today.

They wanted to know who I intended to give my proxy to at the EGM. They had a young young guy who read a scipt (very polite and sweet though).

I think they must have had a busy day phoning their unitholders.

What was their script?

Did they say winding up the trust wouldn't remove the $2 liability?

 

[banco]

Re: Brisconnections shareholders - financial ruin

This bolton guy is a lot savvier then the other 26 year olds I know.

 

[Enzyme]

Re: Brisconnections shareholders - financial ruin

'Ray' has generated a lot of interest. Well, at least he says he has: same link as before

[Responses from interested unitholders] are coming in thick and fast, if it becomes much larger than envisaged I may have to hire an administrative assistant to manage the response

He says he has an add coming in the financial press. We'll keep an eye out.

 

[Shine]

Re: Brisconnections shareholders - financial ruin

What was their script?

Did they say winding up the trust wouldn't remove the $2 liability?

Their script was basically reading out everything I have ever read on the company.

He stated that winding up the trust would not remove the $2 liability.

I asked whether he new about the other party seeking proxy's (Jim Byrnes acting on behalf of the Brisbane Toll Roads Pty Ltd who I had spoken to earlier this week) and he said no he hadn't heard about that.

 

[Enzyme]

Re: Brisconnections shareholders - financial ruin

Their script was basically reading out everything I have ever read on the company.

He stated that winding up the trust would not remove the $2 liability.

I asked whether he new about the other party seeking proxy's (Jim Byrnes acting on behalf of the Brisbane Toll Roads Pty Ltd who I had spoken to earlier this week) and he said no he hadn't heard about that.

That was very brave of them, considering the court is being asked to rule on that point:link

Deutsche Bank counsel Alan Archibald, QC, told Justice Ross Robson that partly paid unitholders were told in the initial public offering that if the company was wound up they would "absolutely" have to pay the second and third $1 instalments, totalling $780 million, to BrisConnections.

But, said Mr Archibald, this was not true and shareholders "could not rule out the possibility that the manager could relieve part or whole of the shareholder liability" if a wind-up occurred.

Depending on the courts ruling, BrisConnections could be in trouble if it gets to the EGM and they've called their unit holders and advised them something that isn't true. Considering that the PDS says in black and white that the liability on the instalment payments can be removed that might be quite likely.

 

[sails]

Re: Brisconnections shareholders - financial ruin

Had my first phone call from Brisconnections today.

They wanted to know who I intended to give my proxy to at the EGM. They had a young young guy who read a scipt (very polite and sweet though).

I think they must have had a busy day phoning their unitholders.

Hey Shine, that must have taken you by surprise and put you on the spot! Did you have to give them an answer, or did you just tell them you were undecided?

Actually, no need to reply if you don't want to disclose your phone call. Sometimes these things are best kept quiet and I understand that...

As long as it's all legal and those owed money get paid, I'm all for it.

That is, the government gets paid their contract break fees, and the tolling rights revert back to the government, and the government gets to re-tender the project

Building and supply contractors will get paid their outstanding invoices and contract break fees (if they negotiated any)

ANZ and any other creditors got paid their loans + interest back

Finally, anything left over gets redistributed back to the unit holders.

If there's enough money left in the trust, this would almost be a perfect out, except that the govt would have to retender.

If there's not enough money left in the trust, then a lot of people will be out of pocket. In which case, it's not really fair on them, and the trust shouldn't be wound up without the second installment being collected and the proceeds distributed to creditors. In that case we open another whole can of worms which we've discussed before.

This is not a zero sum game. Someone has to wear the pain, and I think the order should be:

1. Unit holders, including those who fraudulently dumped shares if a court decides it's fraud.

2. The under writer

3. The banks and other creditors (such as contractors)

4. The tax payer.

- Which you might notice is the exact inverse on who I thought should get paid out and in what order, above.

What are your thoughts on the issue of winding up the trust, and who should be wearing the pain if it does all go sour?

I'm somewhat mystified by your reply! So, is Bolton no longer a Robin Hood in your opinion if the underwriters side with him?

Personally, I have no views on Bolton at this stage with so little information except that as a major shareholder I imagine he would have some rights. As I stated before, he appears to be in a totally different league to the mums and dads caught unawares - and they are the ones whom I am cheering on...

I also don't understand why you say the unit holders should be the first in line pay up when it is fairly well understood that they have no where near the funds which will automatically put it back to the underwriters for whom you appear to have the most sympathy?

I am primarily and options trader (as time permits) and use more technicals than fundamentals. So have no opinions on the trust issues. I'm sure it will be thrashed out in the courts...

However, it is because of the special trading approvals for options and warrants I have had to do every time when opening a new account with a different broker, I have raised the questions as to why shares incurring so much debt do not also require some minimal education and approval before these shares are even available on the watchlist.

As there are possibly only a very small percentage of share traders that would use options or warrants, many would not be aware that such special approvals even existed. This has been the main reason for my posts in this thread.

I am still mystified as to why these shares were still made available after Mrs He got caught unawares last year. Obviously, the powers that be had their reasons, but from the outside looking in, it seems strange to continue allowing potentially unsuitably funded mums and dads access to these exceptionally sophisticated shares.

 

[NiMaC]

Re: Brisconnections shareholders - financial ruin

I'm somewhat mystified by your reply! So, is Bolton no longer a Robin Hood in your opinion if the underwriters side with him?

Personally, I have no views on Bolton at this stage with so little information except that as a major shareholder I imagine he would have some rights. As I stated before, he appears to be in a totally different league to the mums and dads caught unawares - and they are the ones whom I am cheering on...

I also don't understand why you say the unit holders should be the first in line pay up when it is fairly well understood that they have no where near the funds which will automatically put it back to the underwriters for whom you appear to have the most sympathy?

I am primarily and options trader (as time permits) and use more technicals than fundamentals. So have no opinions on the trust issues. I'm sure it will be thrashed out in the courts...

However, it is because of the special trading approvals for options and warrants I have had to do every time when opening a new account with a different broker, I have raised the questions as to why shares incurring so much debt do not also require some minimal education and approval before these shares are even available on the watchlist.

As there are possibly only a very small percentage of share traders that would use options or warrants, many would not be aware that such special approvals even existed. This has been the main reason for my posts in this thread.

I am still mystified as to why these shares were still made available after Mrs He got caught unawares last year. Obviously, the powers that be had their reasons, but from the outside looking in, it seems strange to continue allowing potentially unsuitably funded mums and dads access to these exceptionally sophisticated shares.

Here Here!!!!!
Mabey because they knew what what were doing!!
"Lets hit the uneducated investor, they won't realize until its to late, and then we've got em".

 

[Enzyme]

Re: Brisconnections shareholders - financial ruin

Here is the first report I've found on yesterday's proceedings. Just the fax in debt-laden deed dash

 

[sails]

Re: Brisconnections shareholders - financial ruin

Here is the first report I've found on yesterday's proceedings. Just the fax in debt-laden deed dash

And this is an interesting little excerpt from that same report:

Deutsche Bank has already made a submission to the court that BrisConnections is misleading its members.

"Unit holders have been told … simply and absolutely, that 'you will have to pay $2, full stop'. That is inaccurate," Alan Archibald, QC, for Deutsche, said.

 

[Enzyme]

Re: Brisconnections shareholders - financial ruin

Yep. That was why I asked Shine to confirm if BrisCons included in their script the bit about the $2 liability remaining even if the trusts are wound up.

If BrisCons win the court case there will be no EGM and they have nothing to worry about.

But if they lose the case and it goes down to the EGM they've just bet the house on the judge agreeing with them that winding up the trusts 'absolutely' does not remove the liability. If the judge doesn't agree then they are stuffed. The EGM becomes a lose/lose situation for them. If Bolton and Byrns and Ray get their 75% then the trusts get wound up and they've lost. But if they do manage to 'win' and stop Bolton getting 75% they are now wide open to further court action. The result of the EGM can be challenged because they've provided misleading information. It is back to court before anything gets resolved.

Idiots!

 

[prawn_86]

Re: Brisconnections shareholders - financial ruin

Perhaps any BrisCon holders that have not yet recieved a phone call could set up a recording system so if the do receive a call they can record the script.

 

[Rastan]

Re: Brisconnections shareholders - financial ruin

I sort of gave up on this thread when it became a Sunder vs all rematchathon. Now I come back I see the mysterious Mr Williams has signed up for all of Boltons debt and dissapeared!

I think they will need Scooby Doo and the team to unravel this one and unmask the final villain! This is seriously entertaining from the sidelines, although much sympathy to anyone caught up having to play on the field....

 

[Cats]

Re: Brisconnections shareholders - financial ruin

Their script was basically reading out everything I have ever read on the company.

He stated that winding up the trust would not remove the $2 liability.

I asked whether he new about the other party seeking proxy's (Jim Byrnes acting on behalf of the Brisbane Toll Roads Pty Ltd who I had spoken to earlier this week) and he said no he hadn't heard about that.

Is James W Byrnes and Associates the same as Jim Byrnes ? This is very confusing ........we have a letter from James W Byrnes concerning a proxy and future litigation...........

 

[Julia]

Re: Brisconnections shareholders - financial ruin

Are you able to post the content of the letter?

 

[Shine]

Re: Brisconnections shareholders - financial ruin

Is James W Byrnes and Associates the same as Jim Byrnes ? This is very confusing ........we have a letter from James W Byrnes concerning a proxy and future litigation...........

Yep I'm pretty certain that's him. He's a pretty well known guy. When I spoke to him on the phone (I phoned him to enquire regarding his letter he sent to me re acquiring 19.9% of shares) - he mentioned that he will also be sending out a letter under his signature to seek my proxy.

Sails - when BrisConnections phoned me I was surprised. Of course I was driving and had to pull over (isn't that always the way). But I had all my data on my units in the back seat of the vehicle (I carry it with me everywhere with me these days) so I could quickly grab it and ask any questions I wanted to. I could tell the guy wasn't really interested in what I had to say - he just wanted to get through what he was obliged to tell me. I told them that my proxy was definitely leaning towards Australian Style Investments - but I hadn't made a final decision.

 

[banco]

Re: Brisconnections shareholders - financial ruin

Is this the Jim Byrnes that the Sydney paper's refer to as "colourful"?

 

[Enzyme]

Re: Brisconnections shareholders - financial ruin

The latest reports on yesterdays proceedings:

Key BrisConnections witness faces grilling in court

Toll road options man faces court

Ray implies that the judge made some kind of ruling about the liability on Wednesday, but doesn't say what: same link as before

There are at least 2 known offmarket entities buying stock at 0.00001 cents per unit.

1- has the backing of a offshore hedge fund

2- the other has the support of a litigation funder.

In the event the company being wound up the units will have intrinsic value(Possibly buying 30-50 cents for less than 0.00001 cents)

In the event of the hedge fund becoming the largest shareholder a recapitalisation of the coy will be sought

The combined holding of all 3 entities including Nick Bolton is sufficient to do either as the loan provisions of the building contract will be in breach if they refuse to pay and the underwriters are seeking to avoid the possibility of that happening.

Trevor Rowe and the Qld Governement have a major problem on their hands and for $800 to secure 20% of the company the risk is small even considering the unpaid amounts on the instalments and the judges ruling on that [on Wednesday].

 

[Lisa123]

Re: Brisconnections shareholders - financial ruin

I am an uneducated investor to get into this mess!
And now trying to find a way out.

1. In October/2008, I bought ~1,200,000 units at an average price of 3.2 cents. At that time, the stocks sounded good: the proposed distribution of dividend of 5.95 cents were still in place, fully underwritten, on-schedule, etc.

2. I have read through this read to study a possible way out:

2.1. it seems the only way mentioned is to sell off-market
- Is this absolutely safe, there is no further loss ?

2.2. I wonder if it is also good to:
- setup a company (with me as a director)
- tranfer off-market the units above to the new company
- the $1,200,000 liability will cause bankrupcy
- Could you please advise the complication to me: I assume the the debt collector will not touch my private house. What about my weekly salary ?

3. It is better to act now (either 2.1 or 2.2), or wait for the outcome of the court case ? The units are listed for sale at 0.1 cents since 27-11-2009.

Many thanks!

 

[Enzyme]

Re: Brisconnections shareholders - financial ruin

Hi Lisa,

I am terribly sorry to hear of your situation.

I think you should be careful paying too much attention to what is said in this thread. I am one of many that has been full of suggestions, but I am a total amateur on these issues. I suspect most or all of us are. Get some professional advice.

Regarding the transfer you suggest, BrisConnections have stated that off-market transfers conducted to defeat creditors can be reversed: asx release (page 9)

I don't know if that is true or not, but there is a clear threat.

There are two groups around at the moment who are offering to buy the shares for a nominal amount. There is Jim Byrnes group. I don't know how to get into contact with him, but Shine has his phone number. Perhaps he could send you a Private Message and give you his number. The other group is the 'Ray' group. His email is address is in the thread I've linked to here.

Either of these guys appear to offer a legal way out for you. They will actually buy your shares as opposed to you gifting them away as people did with Bolton, but you will only get $12 for you 1.2 million shares. :-(

 

[Enzyme]

Re: Brisconnections shareholders - financial ruin

3. It is better to act now (either 2.1 or 2.2), or wait for the outcome of the court case ? The units are listed for sale at 0.1 cents since 27-11-2009.

Sorry, I didn't answer this.

With my usual disclaimer that I am not an expert, I'd act ASAP. If BrisCons win the case and the EGM is cancelled then Ray and Byrns might disappear. I think they are hoping to make money on the windup of the trusts. The result of the court case might remove the reason for their interest.